Reconcilable differences: confronting beauty, pornography, and the future of feminism

This volume examines controversial faultlines in contemporary feminism - pornography, the beauty myth, sadomasochism, prostitution, and the issue of rape - from an original and provocative perspective. Lynn Chancer focuses on how, among many feminists, the concepts of sex and sexism became fragmented and mutually exclusive. Exploring the dichotomy between sex and sexism as it has developed through five current feminist debates, Chancer seeks to forge positions that bridge oppositions between unnecessary (and sometimes unwitting) "either/or" binaries. Chancer's book attempts to incorporate both the need for sexual freedom and the depth of sexist subordination into feminist thought and politics

After the Rise and Stall of American Feminism Taking Back a Revolution

Cover -- Contents -- Preface -- 1. Taking Stock -- 2. Debating the "F" Word -- 3. Achieving Political, Economic, and Educational Equalities -- 4. Liberating Sexual Choices -- 5. Ending Violence against Women-and Men -- 6. Changing Sexist Imagery -- 7. Taking Back a Revolution -- Acknowledgments -- Notes -- Index -- A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- Q -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- YDescription based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries

Remembering Catherine Kitty Genovese: A public forum

To mark the fortieth anniversary of the tragic death of Catherine Kitty Genovese on March 13, 1964 in NewYork City, a public forum hosted by Fordham University brought together an interdisciplinary group of experts to look back on this sad event. What follows is a summary of this forum, joined by 100 New Yorkers and the mass media. Even four decades after this tragedy was brought to world-wide attention by the book Thirty-eight witnesses (Rosenthal, 1965), new facts continue to surface about this haunting crime and its aftermath (DeMay, 2004). This forum addressed some timely questions, such as: (1) Were Genovese-type situations rare or common in the past, or even today? (2) How did mass media coverage of Ms. Genovese\u27 1964 tragedy impact society? (3) Why does this woman’s tragedy continue to move us so deeply today, even those of us who were not yet born in 1964? (4) Should U.S. duty-to-aid laws encourage or even oblige citizens to come to each other’s aid in crises if they can safely do so--as is typically the law in other nations? The forum benefited from the expertise of 10 panelists who review diverse aspects of this topi

Public criminologies: diverse perspectives on academia and policy

The origins of this Special Issue of Theoretical Criminology can be located in a ‘Modernizing Criminal Justice’ conference that we both attended in London in June 2002. The high-profile event was co-sponsored by John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York, the Metropolitan Police and the FBI. Broadcasting crews were on hand to digest the plenary speeches of senior representatives of the British government, the judiciary and law enforcement agencies. It was also a highly corporate event, promoting the commercial products of global security and IT companies specializing in criminal justice ‘problem solving’. The opening session of the conference featured a slow motion replay of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers with a voice-over informing the audience that the course of criminal justice had changed forever. This ‘post 9/11’ global war on crime and terrorism theme echoed throughout the plenary speeches and keynote sessions. What was striking was the relegation of the scheduled criminology workshops to the margins of the conference. This set off a discussion between us, during a coffee break, about why academic criminological knowledge was extraneous to the interests of the policy audiences brought together by this conference. And, of course, this quickly moved to discussion of whether criminologists should have a central place in such a forum. But while this is how our interest in criminology and public policy was initially sparked, we later found ourselves trying to pinpoint, more systematically, the different positions criminologists have taken on questions of their relevance and status within larger public policy debates.2 Our purposes in this introduction, and in the Special Issue that follows, are twofold. One aim is to outline a range of views that have been offered by academic criminologists on the discipline’s public status and its relationship to public policy formation and intellectual practice. A second goal is to argue the need for a diversity of ‘public criminologies’ wherein explicit value is placed on moving policies in more progressive directions. Our own point of view is that much more could be done than at present, particularly since there would seem to be broad criminological consensus about many policy issues facing us including punitive policies around the globe as well as the detrimental consequences of a range of harms and risks